Comments on: ORG and FIPR meet with Phorm http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/ Protecting your rights in the digital age Sat, 17 May 2008 05:32:35 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Alan Parker http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163561 Alan Parker Tue, 15 Apr 2008 19:08:42 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163561 Phorm/Webwise is basically junk. It doesn't matter how many details they provide like 'we ignore numbers more than 3 digits'. They should not be *reading* web traffic **CONTENT** - protocol headers you can just about get away with, but what Phorm/Webwise want to do is ILLEGAL. I'm a software engineer, and I can see that their system is nothing magical, it's simply a pile of crap that the ISPs are considering letting loose right in the guts of their network just to generate a few million quid. Why not up the broadband charges a bit and have done with it? Phorm/Webwise is basically junk. It doesn’t matter how many details they provide like ‘we ignore numbers more than 3 digits’. They should not be *reading* web traffic **CONTENT** - protocol headers you can just about get away with, but what Phorm/Webwise want to do is ILLEGAL.

I’m a software engineer, and I can see that their system is nothing magical, it’s simply a pile of crap that the ISPs are considering letting loose right in the guts of their network just to generate a few million quid. Why not up the broadband charges a bit and have done with it?

]]> By: The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » Phorm: public meeting announced for next Tuesday http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163516 The Open Rights Group : Blog Archive » Phorm: public meeting announced for next Tuesday Wed, 09 Apr 2008 15:13:44 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163516 [...] month, we announced that Phorm, the company whose technology delivers targetted ads based on where you visit on the [...] [...] month, we announced that Phorm, the company whose technology delivers targetted ads based on where you visit on the [...]

]]> By: Stazi Republic Of Phormistan http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163495 Stazi Republic Of Phormistan Mon, 07 Apr 2008 22:04:56 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163495 A new petition started calling on the Home Office to launch an investigation into BTs secret trials: http://www.petitiononline.com/BTRipa/petition.html A new petition started calling on the Home Office to launch an investigation into BTs secret trials:

http://www.petitiononline.com/BTRipa/petition.html

]]> By: David M http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163493 David M Mon, 07 Apr 2008 19:56:52 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163493 after many CF re-submitting of petitions on the downing street website and beening rejected every time with such replys as "duplication" were its clearly not,and this laughable latest one "Outside the remit or powers of the Prime Minister and Government" OF1979 had enough and posted at a new place http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33628733-virgin-media-phorm-webwise-adverts-updated-page-172.html#post34523181 heres the petition http://www.petitiononline.com/BTRipa/petition.html "To: UK Prime Minister We, the hereby undersigned, petition the United Kingdom Prime Minister to ask the Home Office to launch an investigation into British Telecom and Phorm criminal breach of section 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) during secret trials in 2006 and 2007. BT have recently admitted to carrying out secret trials of Phorms technology in 2006 and 2007 without their users consent or permission. Many experts, including the Foundation for Information Policy Research and also the Open Rights Group, contend that these trials constituted illegal interception and as such were a criminal breach of RIPA. We ask that the Prime Minister require the Home Office and police to launch an investigation into these criminal breaches which constitute a large scale intrusion of online-privacy. Sincerely, The Undersigned " pass the word please. after many CF re-submitting of petitions on the downing street website and beening rejected every time with such replys as “duplication” were its clearly not,and this laughable latest one “Outside the remit or powers of the Prime Minister and Government”

OF1979 had enough and posted at a new place http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/12/33628733-virgin-media-phorm-webwise-adverts-updated-page-172.html#post34523181

heres the petition

http://www.petitiononline.com/BTRipa/petition.html
“To: UK Prime Minister
We, the hereby undersigned, petition the United Kingdom Prime Minister to ask the Home Office to launch an investigation into British Telecom and Phorm criminal breach of section 1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) during secret trials in 2006 and 2007.

BT have recently admitted to carrying out secret trials of Phorms technology in 2006 and 2007 without their users consent or permission. Many experts, including the Foundation for Information Policy Research and also the Open Rights Group, contend that these trials constituted illegal interception and as such were a criminal breach of RIPA.

We ask that the Prime Minister require the Home Office and police to launch an investigation into these criminal breaches which constitute a large scale intrusion of online-privacy.

Sincerely,

The Undersigned
”
pass the word please.

]]> By: Nick F http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163488 Nick F Sun, 06 Apr 2008 16:27:59 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163488 Many thanks to Richard and Becky for taking the time to visit Phorm and for Richard preparing the report in a form that is understandable. I am still, however, concerned that despite Phorm's openess there is still room for unspecified add-in's, amendments etc which are transparent to their Clients (BT et al). This is only mentioned as all Phorm's comments about the system have categorically stated that no-one will see or have access to the source code except Phorm! The ISP's are therefore totally reliant on Phorm's assurances, written or otherwise and their own testing to prove that there is nothing untoward buried in the code. Is BT's testing that good? - from the performance of their own web-site at times I think not. Can BT test for a sub-routine which could be switched on later without their knowledge? - I don't think so. Additionally if the report on Out-Law.com (Pinset Masons - IT and e-commerce Legal Help site) in mid-March is anything to go by the ICO are "blunting their own teeth" and making their ability to take action or the likelihood of action being taken selective. This may well explain the vagueness of their recent Press Release. Link http://www.out-law.com/page-8955 Many thanks to Richard and Becky for taking the time to visit Phorm and for Richard preparing the report in a form that is understandable.

I am still, however, concerned that despite Phorm’s openess there is still room for unspecified add-in’s, amendments etc which are transparent to their Clients (BT et al). This is only mentioned as all Phorm’s comments about the system have categorically stated that no-one will see or have access to the source code except Phorm! The ISP’s are therefore totally reliant on Phorm’s assurances, written or otherwise and their own testing to prove that there is nothing untoward buried in the code.

Is BT’s testing that good? - from the performance of their own web-site at times I think not.

Can BT test for a sub-routine which could be switched on later without their knowledge? - I don’t think so.

Additionally if the report on Out-Law.com (Pinset Masons - IT and e-commerce Legal Help site) in mid-March is anything to go by the ICO are “blunting their own teeth” and making their ability to take action or the likelihood of action being taken selective. This may well explain the vagueness of their recent Press Release. Link

http://www.out-law.com/page-8955

]]> By: William Morton http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163484 William Morton Sun, 06 Apr 2008 12:17:22 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163484 One question I would like asked at the meeting is, "Is there any agreement in place where the ISP will release their customer's billing information/ personal details to PHORM or its agents" I remember reading the usual spin from PHORM with an faux par from an ISP spokesman that said that the partnership agreement gave PHORM the right top request the ISP to identify the user of a cookie ID but it did not give the scope of information that would be returned. One question I would like asked at the meeting is, “Is there any agreement in place where the ISP will release their customer’s billing information/ personal details to PHORM or its agents”

I remember reading the usual spin from PHORM with an faux par from an ISP spokesman that said that the partnership agreement gave PHORM the right top request the ISP to identify the user of a cookie ID but it did not give the scope of information that would be returned.

]]> By: Oar Wellin http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163483 Oar Wellin Sun, 06 Apr 2008 10:23:45 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163483 I'm sure they wish they could drive up the prices, but who drove them down in the first place? They moved themselves from selling a 'scarce' resource at premium prices to a niche market, over to a low margin bulk business that more than compensated them by volume, '...and now they long for yesterdayayayay', much like the RIAA/BPI. Phorm style interception opens the door to us being exploited multiple times in parallel. Now Experian, a credit checking company, wants to buy in to the same wire-tap to provide an “online competitive intelligence service”. http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article3688387.ece Once Pandora's box has been opened it's open season on us. I’m sure they wish they could drive up the prices, but who drove them down in the first place? They moved themselves from selling a ’scarce’ resource at premium prices to a niche market, over to a low margin bulk business that more than compensated them by volume, ‘…and now they long for yesterdayayayay’, much like the RIAA/BPI.

Phorm style interception opens the door to us being exploited multiple times in parallel. Now Experian, a credit checking company, wants to buy in to the same wire-tap to provide an “online competitive intelligence service”.
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/technology/article3688387.ece

Once Pandora’s box has been opened it’s open season on us.

]]> By: A Very Worried Messenger! http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163482 A Very Worried Messenger! Sun, 06 Apr 2008 09:58:08 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163482 Alex at the moment, this is a UK Issue & there "are" Laws governing this type of behaviour! (We use £'s in the UK) I have no objection to Paying the Proper going rate for a Service, but I do mind "Invasion of Privacy" & very likely leakage of "Personal & Financial Data" Alex at the moment, this is a UK Issue & there “are” Laws governing this type of behaviour!
(We use £’s in the UK)

I have no objection to Paying the Proper going rate for a Service, but I do mind “Invasion of Privacy” & very likely leakage of “Personal & Financial Data”

]]> By: Alex Burke http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163481 Alex Burke Sun, 06 Apr 2008 06:57:54 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163481 Generic IP packet service cannot be market differentiated and sells for a tiny fraction of the prices formerly charged for T-1 private lines and ISDN. I'm sure every telecoms co looks at your broadband line, which you get for $60 a month, and wishes they could charge you $1,000 a month, like the good old days. Now besides getting IP service nearly free, you want privacy as an "entitlement." Who can blame the telcos when someone comes along and says, "look, here's a new revenue stream." If your personal data can be monetized, to help restore some profitability to this business, it probably will be. Or if you truly want a "private" (dedicated) line, like in the old days, maybe it'll run you $1,400 a month. Generic IP packet service cannot be market differentiated and sells for a tiny fraction of the prices formerly charged for T-1 private lines and ISDN. I’m sure every telecoms co looks at your broadband line, which you get for $60 a month, and wishes they could charge you $1,000 a month, like the good old days. Now besides getting IP service nearly free, you want privacy as an “entitlement.” Who can blame the telcos when someone comes along and says, “look, here’s a new revenue stream.” If your personal data can be monetized, to help restore some profitability to this business, it probably will be. Or if you truly want a “private” (dedicated) line, like in the old days, maybe it’ll run you $1,400 a month.

]]> By: Oar Wellin http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163477 Oar Wellin Sat, 05 Apr 2008 00:55:47 +0000 http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/03/28/org-and-fipr-meet-with-phorm/#comment-163477 Radha, is this some very sophisticated PR strategy that is going right over my head? We can read the documents you quote and they plainly do not support your case. Richard Clayton says, "Overall, I learnt nothing about the Phorm system that caused me to change my view that the system performs illegal interception as defined by s1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000", and the ICO statement is merely water treading until you deploy, when a proper assessment can be made of what legislation your system transgresses. To imagine we can be swayed by proffering these documents displays a staggering arrogance, on your part, in your under estimation of our intellectual abilities. Radha, is this some very sophisticated PR strategy that is going right over my head?

We can read the documents you quote and they plainly do not support your case.

Richard Clayton says, “Overall, I learnt nothing about the Phorm system that caused me to change my view that the system performs illegal interception as defined by s1 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000″, and the ICO statement is merely water treading until you deploy, when a proper assessment can be made of what legislation your system transgresses.

To imagine we can be swayed by proffering these documents displays a staggering arrogance, on your part, in your under estimation of our intellectual abilities.

]]>